On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 06:31:49PM +0100, Oliver Elphick wrote:
> > If so, on what grounds was it made? If the ftp-masters
> > believe that the mirroring issue needs to be dealt with first, I think
> > that attempting to override them would be foolish - we don't want to
> > lose good-will with our
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 12:36:35AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > Its a chicken and egg problem, lack of communication creates dissent.
> > Dissent leads to open hosility which you see here. There have been
> > problems wrt James lack of communication for many years, certainly long
> > befo
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 01:50:13PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> > Correct, a resolution that says "Foo must perform action A, instead of
> > not performing action A" is explicitly a no-op under the constitution,
> > and is also obviously silly.
> Correct. The appropriate GR is "Foo shall be removed
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 11:15:16PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 10:19:19PM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> > Even a fresh DD, who has been a NM last year, stated that he won't
> > comment publically against Mr. Troup, because he feared that his
&
4 matches
Mail list logo
